Earlier this year, San Francisco's City Church caved on homosexuality. That's notable because it began as a PCA church plant. In general, that's a very conservative denomination.
More recently, another church on the left coast caved:
That's notable because Intown Pres Church is a PCA denomination.
In addition, these may not be isolated cases:
i) I seriously doubt it's coincidental that both churches are located deep in blue state country (Portland, San Francisco). They are cratering under the prevailing social mores of their surroundings.
ii) A few years ago, the pastor (Brian Prentiss) of Intown church defended the pastor (Fred Harrell) of City Church:
Recently, Prentiss also made a very insulting comment about Christians who affirm that the human race goes back to Adam and Eve:
iii) I wonder if there may not be a connection to the "Escondido theology," viz. Hart's A Secular Faith. Let's surrender the culture wars to the enemy.
Finally, the fact that Bible-belt churches are less likely to fold in the culture wars doesn't necessarily mean they are anymore committed to orthodoxy and orthopraxy than City Church (SF) or Intown Church (Portland). It's just that, as of yet, they aren't subject to the same seductive or oppressive environment. So we shouldn't take false comfort in that. To some extent that's cultural Christianity. There may be extensive dryrot in many outwardly sound churches. It only takes a polical windstorm for them to collapse. We need sound theology, apologetics, and piety to stay strong. Otherwise, churches lack structural integrity.
"We need sound theology, apologetics, and piety to stay strong. Otherwise, churches lack structural integrity."
ReplyDeleteExactly right. And this is nothing more or less than the call to holiness and fidelity which the Scriptures themselves repeatedly and pointedly exhort believers of all ages.
Over ten ten years ago I asked DGH at a lecture he gave at a local opc church whether he thought there were better safeguards against liberalism among pastors who held to a distinctly presuppositional epistemology, one rooted in Scripture. His answer indicated he hadn't grasped the additional grounding that comes with being maturely presuppositional, let alone the the limits of the book of nature when rent asunder from special revelation.
ReplyDeleteA fragile handle on a truly Reforned theory of knowledge coupled with an unfortunate disdain for Christian worldview precepts is a recipe for disaster.
Steve
ReplyDeleteRegarding your iii, this quote is taken from the linked article below it:
Someone could construct a "compelling argument," analogous to VanDrunen's case against abortion, in order to defend legalizing homosexual marriages. Here it is: "Based upon the growing social consensus that homosexual intercourse is morally acceptable, and based upon observation of the personal physical and emotional satisfaction derived from such a practice, every consensual form of homosexual expression should be legalized and afforded every civil protection." Why not?
http://opc.org/os.html?article_id=77